Hartmann: claims vs. victories

[Nokose]

From research by Nikita Ergorov for Hartman on the 20 Sep 43. La-5 of 31 IAP flown by St. Lt. Pavel Korneevich Leonenko during 13:54 - 15:12 (Moscow) was shot down 4 km E. of Derezovatka from the side of the sun. He was listed as KIA.

Lt. Erich Hartmann 9./JG 52 LaGG (99) 13:40 59474 at 2000 m.

[BenFolk]

Hello

On June 8, 1944, the Germans reported the shooting down of 7 Aircobras;

Ltn. Werner Fass 6./SG 2 13.50
Fw. Erich Müller Stab./SG 2 13.50
Fw. Dieter Voight Stab./SG 2 13.55
Obstlt. Dietrich Hrabak Stab./JG 52 19.20
Ltn. Heinz Sachsenberger 6./JG 52 13.13
Ltn. Heinz Sachsenberger 6./JG 52 13.14
Ltn.Heinz Ewald 6./JG 52 17.38

The 5 VA, however, only reported one loss in aerial combat and one Aircobra did not return from the enemy flight. 20 P-39s took part in the aerial battles. 4 of the 104 GvIAP had to fight against Fw190s.
Takeoff at at 1.54 p.m.; Landing at 2:37 p.m. (Information for all 4 aircraft). After that report the loss of Stepanov and Rygamancov's plane was slightly damaged.
The aircraft from mechanic Guard Senior Sergeant Elagin from 104 GvIAP being serviced made an emergency landing in the mountainous terrain in the area of Jassy. Elagin evacuated the aircraft from the front line and restored it, then gave the pilot a chance to take it to his airfield. So not even three returned to the airfield, only two P-39s. The Soviets do not write anything about this in their chronicles, although the forced landing may have looked like a crash.
So I think we will argue for a long time about the aerial victories of the Germans or other nations, as long as not all the documents can really be checked. The ones you see now are not flawless.
Still another example;
During the Yaass operation, mechanic Isagulov's 104 GvIAP aircraft, shot down in aerial combat, made two emergency landings on the front line. Isagulov evacuated the plane to his airfield and put it into operation on time.

Greeting
BenFolk

[bavgan]

Here is an article about Hartmann published in a peer-reviewed journal. https://uir.unisa.ac.za/handle/10500/26467

Sad to see that the name of the journal has "science" in it. The authors straightly defined the Bf 109 as superior to all other WW2 aircraft which is an indication that they had no idea about the evolution of technologies during the war. After the introduction, I decided not to read it the rest of the article, except the conclusion section, where the authors concluded to nothing new. Unfortunately, while revealing nothing new, they received their academic points in their institutions for publishing an article in a journal.

[HGabor]

Sad, but not surprising. In the past several decades many people were surfing on the waves of Hartmann's '352' - without checking any facts. When I see this number, I cannot read on either... (I mean the claims might be correct, since they were filed indeed, but their actual contents, ie. the victories are only in fragments - and the two are absolutely not the same!)

Gabor

[keith A]

Definitely a purchase for me next year Gabor, well done to you and your co-author. Long overdue and very much anticipated

best regards

Keith

[HGabor]

Thank you Keith, we hope it will meet your expectations.
Gabor

[Mirek Wawrzynski]

"Answer is simple: because the Soviets did not report everything. Polish Campaign 1939 is a good example: some Soviet planes were downed by Polish fighters. Some of the Soviet aircrews were captured and interrogated but there is no trace in Soviet documents".

I know three such incidents. I wrote about them in detail in my 2008 book on the subject, "Red Stars - an Ally of Black Crosses over Poland", Warsaw 2008. One of these cases is very debatable. The Polish pilot wrote in the documents that he had fought in the air and shot down the "R-5", and years later he wrote in his memoirs that he did not shoot this Soviet plane, but flew around it and did not fire. There are documents - his manual report from 1939, and there are memoirs published years later. Who to believe now? The same person - pilot and diffferent time and place.

In the case of their losses, the Russians did not hide it at all, when they had losses, they would list them in documents; there is only a question of why the loss occurs. It was similar with Germany in 1939 or later. Such cases during the Second World War were not uncommon, the pilots said one thing, and then completely different turned out.

It is much easier and simpler to write: the Russians did not write in the report, the Russians are hiding. It's a regular mambo jumbo.

The plane is too expensive and the pilot and crew are also not ghosts to disappear from official military documentation. There is no such option, the military is a bureaucracy.

Staff - military bureaucracy - must love papers, i.e. writing reports, this is their basis of existence, production of reports, orders, etc.

R.
mirekw

[kaki3152]

I, too am looking forward to purchasing your book, Gabor. I have noted in recent years that many of the new books on WWII are rehashes of prior knowledge. Books that reflect "new" [old knowledge previously unknown] and in-depth research are a joy to find.

[MW Giles]

Even if it is great fun, worrying about the scores of aces is irrelevant and a fallacy.

It does not matter in the slightest whether Herr X shot down 9 or whether the ninth one force landed and was repaired within 24 hours; he only should be credited with 8 and therefore he is a blaggard for his false claiming

Aces' claims are only that, claims. Some are true and some mistaken and some fraudulent. They do not really matter, other than to the ego and reputation of the person in question

However what does matter in regards to winning a war is can the fighters on one side establish and maintain air superiority to such an extent that the other side cannot function and is thereby prevented from exerting its will on the battlefield or in producing war material.

It does not matter if one side claimed 1000 shot down, it is just a claim and an indication of how successful they feel they have been (rightly or wrongly).
What matters is did they collectively move in a positive direction toward achieving and maintaining air superiority.

There I said it, just waiting for the bolt of lightning and the ground to open up beneath my feet.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by MW Giles

It does not matter if one side claimed 1000 shot down, it is just a claim and an indication of how successful they feel they have been (rightly or wrongly).
What matters is did they collectively move in a positive direction toward achieving and maintaining air superiority.

There I said it, just waiting for the bolt of lightning and the ground to open up beneath my feet.

I'd argue that it matters for the researcher/historian to try and work out what actually happened. League tables don't interest me in the slightest and my perspective on Hartmann is that even if he "only" shot down (say) 70 aircraft, he was still a massively successful fighter pilot.